It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Diversity boss: Whites must 'step down'

page: 8
49
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by buds84
 


Thanks I didn't know that. I guess that's what happens when you get your impressions of ancient Egypt from hollywood movies and video games rather than a history book.




posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
I am white, but I have never heard a white person admit they lost a job because they were less qualified than a minority. It's always "reverse discrimination" that lost them the opportunity.

Isn't it possible that sometimes a minority person really is the most capable applicant? (If your answer is no, then you, too, may be a racist).






[edit on 25-9-2009 by Sestias]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by buds84
 


The source you mentioned is highly dubious and I would have a hard time believing that places like Athens were actually "stolen from the Nubians". I've also never heard anything about sea travel in relation to pre-dynastic African tribes.

I believe one of the oldest references to a sea people in Egypt would be the "Danu" or sea people that might be related to Mediterranean people.

Never the less, I look forward to your topic, I was thinking of starting one but I thought I'd let you have the opening argument.

I've heard some of the ideas you mentioned before but only from the Nation of Islam people that hang out on the street and yell at white people, this would be a good opportunity to argue against these ideas without getting shot


EDIT: please U2U me when you do create the thread

[edit on 25-9-2009 by Shadowflux]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Sadly, this kind of proves that blacks are the most racist in the country.

[edit on 26-9-2009 by LooseLipsSinkShips]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wimbly
Hes clearly saying that people have to say who is going to step down. As in, someone has to choose the white people that will step down. In other words, force them out.


Listen to the audio. It's clearly a question. I listened to the audio and typed it in before I found the quote elsewhere. That's why I put a question mark. Because in the audio, you can clearly tell he is asking a question.

Truth is... whoever put this out there (wnd?) REMOVED the question mark from his quote so that people would get all up in arms about it... It worked. You all fell for it.

The typed out question should read:

We're in a position where you have to say, "Who is going to step down so someone else can have power"?

[edit on 25-9-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 



We're in a position where you have to say, "Who is going to step down so someone else can have power"?


Even if you're right, how does that make it any better? If some Bush appointee was speaking at an event and suggested that black people step down from some position, would you be here equivocating?

Fire, hiring or asking people to step down based on race is wrong and you know it.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


You are on Obama's payroll? Just kidding of course.

There is an obvious pattern to Obama's appointments and associations. I know you are a die hard Partisan but at some point you have to admit that the Obama who ran for office is not the Obama who is President?

Remember these:
NO Lobbyists.
NO Special Interests.
Transparency.

Did you believe him when he promised that? Do you care he lied? Even a little bit?



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wimbly
Even if you're right, how does that make it any better?


Well, said one way (your way), it sounds like someone is going to appoint people to step down so minorities can take their jobs. That's how YOU put it and that's how WND put it. THAT is equivocation. THAT is misleading. That is a lie.

Said the other way (the way it was actually said) it sounds like a rhetorical question asked to make a point that people are not going to voluntarily give up their jobs so a minority can have it. THAT is the truth.

So the difference is that one is a lie and one is the truth. It's pretty simple.



If some Bush appointee was speaking at an event and suggested that black people step down from some position, would you be here equivocating?


If someone misquoted a Bush appointee (or ANYONE) and I knew about it, you bet your ass I would be here pointing it out.



Fire, hiring or asking people to step down based on race is wrong and you know it.


Yes, I do know that.

My first post in this thread was to correct the quote and let people who cared, know about the truth of the statement. That is my purpose here. I'm not making a judgment on the statement because I haven't been able to find a transcript of the whole discussion so I can determine what they were talking about in context.

[edit on 25-9-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I know you are a die hard Partisan


You know no such thing. I'm not a Democrat. I don't belong to a party. I believe in the truth. And I am not inclined to answer your questions after your comments. This thread isn't about my opinions of Obama. And my opinions about Obama don't matter. This thread is about a quote taken ENTIRELY out of context and put forth to get people frothing at the mouth, And that's what happened. I just brought some logic and truth to the thread.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by RoofMonkey



Having an entire neighborhood succumb to the idolization of criminals and criminal activity accompanied by a wholesale refutation of personal responsibility and integrity does not make for a viable learning experience.


Of course it doesn’t, but who is in charge of marketing and promoting the idolization of criminals and criminal activity to the people in question? Moreover, how can you expect the majority of people in this predicament to take personal responsibility and maintain an ounce of integrating when institutional deviance is a contributor to the problem?


It didn't work for Italian immigrants, it didn't work for Irish immigrants


How come it didn’t? Both groups have reaped the rewards of criminals and criminal activity, and do so currently.


Any group that wishes to become successful in their own right has to weed themselves of this mindset.


Refer to previous comments.


Bleating "victimization" at every pass because you won't enforce civility and constructive behavior on your own society gets old pretty damned fast. Embracing the mindset of a thug will not get you any favors.


Who is “bleating victimization at every pass”? Moreover, what is the correlation between what you said and what you quoted?


[edit on 25-9-2009 by EMPIRE]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by EMPIRE


Who is “bleating victimization at every pass”? Moreover, what is the correlation between what you said and what you quoted?


[edit on 25-9-2009 by EMPIRE]


I'm not going to get suckered into that one. Refer to whatever news outlet you prefer. It's there, all you have to do is open your eyes.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by RoofMonkey



I'm not going to get suckered into that one. Refer to whatever news outlet you prefer. It's there, all you have to do is open your eyes.


You aren't getting suckered into anything. You are making claims and statements, and my questions are strictly based on your claims and statements. I will not refer to any news outlet as no news outlet posted here and made the claims you did. All you have to do is open your eyes, stop cherry picking and refrain from making claims if you aren't articulate/knowledgable enough to support your own words.



[edit on 25-9-2009 by EMPIRE]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   
I believe this was already tried several times on a board scale in Africa. Remember Rhodesia, a prosperous relatively peaceful country until the whites were told step down from power or die. Well today you have a shining example of industrial might, an economic juggernaught and the black utopia that is Zimbabwe. Yeah that's gonna work here. Clearly, diversity and affirmative action are code words for reverse discrimination. Giving away what should be earned is recipe for societal decline. Let everyone compete. Talent will out !!!!!



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by EMPIRE

You aren't getting suckered into anything. You are making claims and statements, and my questions are strictly based on your claims and statements.



No, you stated:


Originally posted by EMPIRE


Who is “bleating victimization at every pass”? Moreover, what is the correlation between what you said and what you quoted?


[edit on 25-9-2009 by EMPIRE]


Any attempt to answer this will likely lead into categorization of me as being "racist" simply because I answered your question. I will not be party to being relegated to a box and labeled so that my opinion is easily dismissed.

If you really want to know "who" all you have to do is take the emotional blinders off and look at the news, or a magazine... or even a newspaper. Just find the group or groups bleating about historical justice or the "correction" of historical injustices.

Have there been issues in the past? Most certainly. All races have encountered it at some time in their history.

A level playing field is a level playing field. That's it.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 07:47 PM
link   
It seems ever since Obama was elected racism toward white people has increased tenfold. Co insidence?

Telling white people to step down is racist anyway you look at it!



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by RoofMonkey



No, you stated:Originally posted by EMPIRE

Who is “bleating victimization at every pass”? Moreover, what is the correlation between what you said and what you quoted?


And those questions were based on you stating:


Bleating "victimization" at every pass because you won't enforce civility and constructive behavior on your own society gets old pretty damned fast. Embracing the mindset of a thug will not get you any favors.



Any attempt to answer this will likely lead into categorization of me as being "racist" simply because I answered your question.


So it’s ok to make sweeping generalizations and not be held accountable for your words based on what you think someone may or may not label you as? If any attempt to answer it may lead to such categorizations why make the statements to begin with? Moreover, and this is equally important, who do you think is going to make the claim that you’re racist?


I will not be party to being relegated to a box and labeled so that my opinion is easily dismissed.


You’re placing yourself in a box by making claims and refusing to answer questions that are on topic and 100% related to your very own words. By refusing to expound on your words, and clarify, you’re dismissing your own opinion.


If you really want to know "who" all you have to do is take the emotional blinders off and look at the news, or a magazine... or even a newspaper.


I don’t have emotional blinders on, and there is nothing I’ve said that can be considered emotional or anything remotely linked to emotions. Moreover, simply saying “look at the news, or a magazine” doesn’t help anyone, as there are millions of news channels, magazines and newspapers. Do I need to look at Sports News Network? Do I need to look at WWE Magazine? What exactly are you suggesting I read/watch and are these sources unbiased?


Just find the group or groups bleating about historical justice or the "correction" of historical injustices.


Again who are these groups? I don’t know of any group bleating about the issues you mentioned. Do groups mention it, make it a point to bring it to the public eye, and seek to correct such things? Yes. Do some groups use it to further their own agenda? Yes. Is anyone bleating? No. I‘m curious, are the jews bleating when they remind everyone of the holocaust?


Have there been issues in the past? Most certainly. All races have encountered it at some time in their history.


Yes, but not all races have made advancements from past issues that still plague us today. And since these issues have not been rectified, why would you erroneously label the discussion or correction of such injustices as bleating?


A level playing field is a level playing field. That's it.


I’ve already dismantled your premise and claims that an equal playing field exists. Do yourself a favor and address those points. That’s it.

[edit on 25-9-2009 by EMPIRE]



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
Mark Lloyd is another Obama racist scumbag, what he should do is get some of the Blacks and Hispanics out of the NFL, NBA and Professional Baseball and let more White Guys in!



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boomer1941
Mark Lloyd is another Obama racist scumbag, what he should do is get some of the Blacks and Hispanics out of the NFL, NBA and Professional Baseball and let more White Guys in!


And while he's at it he should get more whites and jews out of the owners suites and management positions of the NFL, NBA and MLB and put more blacks and hispanics in. It's obvious you didn't listen to the audio clip.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by EMPIRE

Again who are these groups? I don’t know of any group bleating about the issues you mentioned. Do groups mention it, make it a point to bring it to the public eye, and seek to correct such things? Yes. Do some groups use it to further their own agenda? Yes. Is anyone bleating? No. I‘m curious, are the jews bleating when they remind everyone of the holocaust?

...

I’ve already dismantled your premise and claims that an equal playing field exists. Do yourself a favor and address those points. That’s it.



Careful, your selective blindness is showing.

As for dismantling, you have done nothing of the sort. Spewed a little bit of mindless rhetoric? Yeah, I'll give you that. Tried to bait someone into a box? Yup. You seem to have a rather pervasive chip there on your shoulder.



posted on Sep, 25 2009 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Chronogoblin
 

racism is a disease of the soul.

Race and racism is a touchy subject, no matter who your audience might be. It’s certainly a hot-button issue with me. I have been personally affected by it. My aunt was raped and murdered because of it. I’ve been beaten up because of it. The thing is, instead of blaming blacks and Hispanics, I realized I needed to blame the real, root cause: Racism itself.

Think of racism as a disease, an especially tenacious, especially virulent one. Think of it as a sort of leprosy of the soul. To ignore a racist sentiment overheard in a public setting is to ignore a symptom of this dangerous disease. To say ‘that ethnic slur doesn’t affect me, since I am not the target’ is to say ‘that person with untreated leprosy coughing on the communal silverware doesn’t affect me, as I am using chopsticks.’ You know what? You’re right. It doesn’t affect you… yet.

No one is born a racist, just as no one is born a leper. Like leprosy, racism takes a long, long time to inculcate, but once it takes hold is hideously deforming. Like leprosy, racism can with great difficulty be arrested, but the damage done is irreversible.

posted by MercerMachine at 10:33 AM

somethingstickythiswaycomes.blogspot.com...

the human race is one. we are a one people. racism is a sickness, a cancer eating at the core of those that think themselves better/lesser. our government is playing on this ace in the hole. our government is using racism to divide our country, to destroy us from within.


[edit on 25-9-2009 by musselwhite]




top topics



 
49
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join